[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

After some reading on- and off-line, I'm exploring the use of -clogit- to counter this (although I incur a substantial df cost since -clogit- models only produce estimates for groups and not individuals). As a test, I've fitted this model: note: multiple positive outcomes within groups encountered. note: 66 groups (263 obs) dropped due to all positive or all negative outcomes. [...] Conditional (fixed-effects) logistic regression Number of obs = 1249 Wald chi2(12) = 175.60 Prob > chi2 = 0.0000 Log pseudolikelihood = -374.99176 Pseudo R2 = 0.3333 (standard errors adjusted for clustering on newparln) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Robust con01ge | Coef. Std. Err. z P>|z| [95% Conf. Interval] -----------+---------------------------------------------------------------- con99le | 1.965858 .2322615 8.46 0.000 1.510634 2.421082 lab99le | -1.366049 .3604063 -3.79 0.000 -2.072432 -.6596655 ldm99le | -.2783222 .2425517 -1.15 0.251 -.7537148 .1970703 con00le | 2.268708 .3634956 6.24 0.000 1.55627 2.981147 lab00le | -.6086171 .5684727 -1.07 0.284 -1.722803 .5055689 ldm00le | .0275779 .3858629 0.07 0.943 -.7286996 .7838553 toutle99 | .0192292 .0396104 0.49 0.627 -.0584058 .0968643 tout00le | -.1089908 .0429779 -2.54 0.011 -.1932259 -.0247558 gecpst01 | .4763015 .1203856 3.96 0.000 .24035 .7122531 gecxpc01 | .1244878 .0745309 1.67 0.095 -.0215901 .2705657 ghinps01 | .1295617 .0822547 1.58 0.115 -.0316546 .290778 ghinxp01 | .0834748 .0889073 0.94 0.348 -.0907802 .2577299 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- All of these variables are extremely well-behaved as far as collinearity are concerned. The main findings here are that voting Conservative at local council elections 1 or 2 years earlier before the general election (GE)raised the odds of voting Conservative again at the GE, as we would expect, net of all other effects. The key question is this: are these valid findings from fitting such a model? To ask a 'supplementary' question: if using -clogit- _is_ valid, am I right in saying that including 'alternative-specfic constants' (Liao, 1994: 61-2) wouldn't make sense in estimating the above model? (it certainly produces garbage output!). Thanks. CLIVE NICHOLAS |t: 0(044)7903 397793 Politics |e: clive.nicholas@ncl.ac.uk Newcastle University |http://www.ncl.ac.uk/geps Liao TF (1994) INTERPRETING PROBABILITY MODELS, Sage QASS Series Paper 07-101, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

- Prev by Date:
**st: Am I using -clogit- properly?** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: how to lie with statistics, 2004 edition...** - Previous by thread:
**st: RE: note option in the twoway graph going nuts** - Next by thread:
**st: weighted logit - predict residuals?** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2016 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |